A tweetstorm from Marc Andreessen

  • 0
    1/Fascinating question around Christensen's theory of disruption: "OK, smart guy, why haven't Apple iPhone/iPad been disrupted by Android?"
  • 1
    2/I count five possible answers; there may be more...
  • 2
    3/A. Theory of disruption is hucksterish management consultant fraud. (This one I do not agree with.)
  • 3
    4/B. Right now Apple *is* the disruptor--iPhones/iPads vs Windows PCs. Many surprised by rapid rise of direct substitution, including me.
  • 4
    5/C. Apple *is* getting disrupted right now: Android phones outselling iPhones somewhere between 5:1 and 10:1 worldwide right now.
  • 5
    6/D: Related to C, Apple isn't getting disrupted *yet*, but will be soon. This is what many in Silicon Valley believe, but Apple does not.
  • 6
    7/E: The most interesting one: Current theory of disruption is incomplete; does not have a broad enough concept of end-user quality.
  • 7
    8/In this line of argument, disruption theory was born in Microsoft/Intel era, when everyone expected computers to have, um, certain issues.
  • 8
    9/Apple brilliantly redefined conception what was possible from end-user quality and integration standpoint, against prevailing assumptions.
  • 9
    10/We have attempted to generalize *this* concept into "full stack" thinking, which many of today's best startups are also pursuing.
  • 11/It's possible disruption theory needs to be evolved to accommodate these newer patterns and learnings...
  • 12/But it's also possible all such "full stack" patterns are just integrated approaches that themselves will be disrupted in the future.
  • 13/Time will tell. In Silicon Valley, these topics are central and being debated both in actions and words by ultra-smart people every day.
  • 14/References: http://t.co/HJI1nL97C9 http://t.co/Gxz600QDIh + Discussions w/@cdixon @stevesi @balajis @bhorowitz & others.